Advertisement

Synthese

, Volume 176, Issue 1, pp 125–147 | Cite as

The medium or the message? Communication relevance and richness in trust games

  • Cristina BicchieriEmail author
  • Azi Lev-On
  • Alex Chavez
Article

Abstract

Subjects communicated prior to playing trust games; the richness of the communication media and the topics of conversation were manipulated. Communication richness failed to produce significant differences in first-mover investments. However, the topics of conversation made a significant difference: the amounts sent were considerably higher in the unrestricted communication conditions than in the restricted communication and no-communication conditions. Most importantly, we find that first-movers’ expectations of second-movers’ reciprocation are influenced by communication and strongly predict their levels of investment.

Keywords

Trust Laboratory experiments Communication Social norms Cooperation Computer-mediated communication 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ben-Ner, A., & Putterman, L. (2006). Trust, communication and contracts: Experimental evidence. Working Paper 2006-23, Department of Economics, Brown University.Google Scholar
  2. Bicchieri C. (2002) Covenants without swords: group identity, norms, and communication in social dilemmas. Rationality and Society 14(2): 192–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bicchieri C. (2006) The grammar of society: the nature and dynamics of social norms. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Bicchieri C., Lev-On A. (2007) Computer-mediated communication and cooperation in social dilemmas: an experimental analysis. Politics Philosophy and Economics 6: 139–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bochet O., Page T., Putterman L. (2006) Communication and punishment in voluntary contribution experiments. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 60: 11–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bochet, O., & Putterman, L. (2007). Not just babble: Opening the black box of communication in a voluntary contribution experiment. http://www.personeel.unimaas.nl/o.bochet/www/notjustbabble.pdf.
  7. Bohnet I., Baytelman Y. (2007) Institutions and trust: Implications for preferences, beliefs and behavior. Rationality and Society 19: 99–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bos, N., Gergle, D., Olson, J. S., & Olson, G. M. (2001). Being there versus seeing there: Trust via video. In Proceedings of CHI 2001 (pp. 291–292).Google Scholar
  9. Bouas K.S., Komorita S.S. (1996) Group discussion and cooperation in social dilemmas. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 22: 1144–1150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brosig J., Ockenfels A., Weimann J. (2003) The effect of communication media on cooperation. German Economic Review 4: 217–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buchan N.R., Croson R.T.A., Johnson E.J. (2006) Let’s get personal: An international examination of the influence of communication, culture, and social distance on other regarding preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 60: 373–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Camerer C. (2003) Behavioral game theory. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  13. Charness G., Dufwenberg M. (2006) Promises and partnership. Econometrica 74: 1579–1601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen X.P., Komorita S.S. (1994) The effects of communication and commitment in a public goods social dilemma. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 60: 367–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dawes R.M., McTavish J., Shaklee H. (1977) Behavior, communication, and assumptions about other people’s behavior in a commons dilemma situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35: 1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ellingsen T., Johannseeon M. (2004) Promises, threats and fairness. Economic Journal 114: 397–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Frohlich N., Oppenheimer J. (1998) Some consequences of e-mail vs. face to face communication in experiment. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 35: 389–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gächter S., Fehr E. (1999) Collective action as a social exchange. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 39: 341–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ledyard J.O. (1995) Public goods: a survey of experimental research. In: Kagel J.H., Roth A.E. (eds) The handbook of experimental economics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 111–194Google Scholar
  20. McLuhan M., Fiore Q. (1967) The medium is the message. Bantam Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Palfrey T.R., Rosenthal H. (1991) Testing for the effects of cheap talk. Games and Economic Behavior 3: 183–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rocco, E. (1998). Trust breaks down in electronic contexts but can be repaired by some initial face-to-face contact. In Proceedings of CHI 1998 (pp. 496–502).Google Scholar
  23. Sally D. (1995) Conversation and cooperation in social dilemmas. Rationality and Society 7: 58–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Zheng, J., Veinott, E., Bos, N., Olson, J. S., & Olson, G. M. (2002). Trust without touch: Jumpstarting trust with initial social activities. In Proceedings of CHI 2002 (pp. 141–146).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  2. 2.University of MichiganMichiganUSA

Personalised recommendations